Men, how do you feel about the forum?

[FollowingHim]

Companion thread to this.

There are two separate but related issues with male engagement that have been brought to my attention, that may be present on this forum, and may be the underlying causes of why a number of women are uncomfortable posting here. It has been made clear to me by some that we don't just have an issue with women being uncomfortable, but men also.

1) Mild-mannered men declining to visit / post frequently. As a result, threads can be dominated by more fiery viewpoints.

One of the results being:

2) Some men getting driven away entirely by the level of criticism they encounter. This is a real problem that has occurred with a short list of individuals.

The other result being that many women feel uncomfortable posting also, as discussed over on the companion thread.

My fear is that this forum is a great place for a short list of outspoken individuals to debate matters, but many others who could benefit from the marriage ministry side of the forum, the actual primary purpose of it all, may be quietly drifting away as they do not like the atmosphere here.

Are these problems real? Are we doing well over here, or not? Do we need to change anything, and if so what?

 

[Asforme&myhouse]

Feel? FEEL?? We are men. We don’t feel.

If everyone here, including myself, were more Christ like, i think it would be a way more enjoyable place. However, until we meet Him face to face, I think we should all choose to love one another no matter how obnoxious we might find each other.

Love for one another is a genuine care for each others well being, not just being “nice”, which is something that is often forgotten. Some of the abrasiveness here is do to people being willing to be honest with each other. I would rather have a friend wound me because they want me to be better, than to receive kisses from an enemy. If someone is genuinely mean to you for no reason, as a Christian, we should view that as an opportunity to be a Christ like witness. We’re christians, we’re not supposed to get all butt hurt, we are supposed to imitate Christ.

Edit: can you add another selection to the survey? Something like: casually annoyed, sometimes highly entertained, but mostly I just accept my brothers’ and sisters’ flaws and idiosyncrasies and love them regardless and I’m here because we’re family.

 

[yoderfamily]

Edit: can you add another selection to the survey? Something like: casually annoyed, sometimes highly entertained, but mostly I just accept my brothers’ and sisters’ flaws and idiosyncrasies and love them regardless and I’m here because we’re family.

Like the above!!.

I do think the personal attacks are off putting. Would like to see more of the perceived Christlike attitude that Asforme was referring to.
Something that I keep thinking about throughout the recent reflection on bf participation and the thread concerning players or catfishers is a saying from a former fire chief.

Wherever there are people, People will be people.

Our response to them is what will set us apart.

 

[Slumberfreeze]

casually annoyed, sometimes highly entertained

That is a fair sum up of my feelings as well hahahahaha

 

[Verifyveritas76]

One of the benefits I’ve noticed with this forum is that it has definitely convinced me that I need to grow in grace and graciousness, even when that is not my natural inclination.

I confess I fail often, but am attempting to emulate stellar examples like @FollowingHim @PeteR and @Keith Martin

 

[rockfox]

I was one of those who brought this issue up, but not because I necessarily feel we are treating men badly. But because our concerns are unbalanced.

Everyone is all concerned about women feeling bad, yet not once have I heard anyone express concern about men being made not to feel welcome on this forum. Yet in just the last two months I've seen at least 5 different men driven away from here (compared to just 1 woman).

Why is that?

One potential answer is no one gives a sh!t about men. That's pretty much the default in our culture. But if we're serious about this being a 'family' ministry, we should care.

Another potential answer is we aren't to be allowed any men spaces. Everywhere in our culture male spaces are being hunted down and eliminated. If a woman want's in or is offended by the men's actions then something must change.

Another potential answer is this place isn't really any different than most churches, the women rule by proxy through their husbands and the women here are upset so something must change.

Another potential answer is it's all about the women. People care more about not scaring off potential wives than they do actual ministry to families (which includes men). I've seen more than one comment to the effect of, "don't say that, you'll scare away the women" where 'that' is a truth taught in scripture.

Now I understand why some of those men were driven off, many were grandiose spurges and we're probably better off without them around. But they were merely annoying. In contrast the woman whose thread (teaching on submission) which prompted all this concern about how women feel, her teachings were actively dangerous.

 

[Mojo]

A lot of chest thumping and grunting. I like mine in moderation.

 

[cnystrom]

How exactly were the made to feel unwelcome? Were they newbies who fell into the deep end too soon, or what?

1 Cor 14: 32,33

 

[AmericanIsraelite]

I don't participate here much, so take this for what it's worth.
My observation has been that people that come here for help will get a few good responses and then their thread will quickly get derailed and spiral out of control.
I would propose that if this is more of a marriage ministry, that you provide people with marriage issues a separate platform/subforum. Perhaps appoint certain men and women on the forum that have shown themselves more able to give good advice to serve in that capacity. Other members wanting to discuss issues brought up by the original poster could start a related thread.
Of course the original poster could choose to post in the regular forums if they want the input of all members. We will just hope they have thicker skins.

For myself, I think the forum is fine as it is. I have always liked letting people be who they are, and letting their real colors show. To me that's a good thing.

 

[PeteR]

@Verifyveritas76 , you are too kind. I can have a pretty sharp tongue, too...

After about 7500 posts moderating a Christian prophecy forum some years ago, there comes a general understanding that the lack of emotion in written text more easily opens the door for misunderstanding or over reading an emotion. For me, the result was to try to dial it back a notch and to try to use nonconfrontational phrases that make the point without pointing a finger. I don't always remember or follow my own lessons, but it helps.

'...kind, forgiving one another, tenderhearted. ..'

I lurked for months before introducing myself and used a pseudonym initially out of real concern joining this board. I had greater concern for my external ministry presence discovering me here than anyone on the board recognizing me. I joined because I needed interaction and support with a challenging truth I had discovered. And, I joined because I saw a vibrant, lively, loving community where men could be men and sharpen each other with love. Personally, the atmosphere has only gotten better, though we have our moments.

Our biggest weakness is piling on. Often there are times we do need a strong defense or rebuke, but many times e pile on instead of letting one or two handle the matter. This is when a thread begins to go south. I try to remind myself to take a step back if it is a lady or new member... older members, especially men, are more tempered and we 'can take it on the chin better.'

I love this place and believe we are learning and growing in an extremely valuable area. Not much I would change besides asking guys to slow down and take a deep breath when things get chippy. Be intentional about waiting to post when emotions are high, else we become a less Godly body of sharks that smell blood in the water. ...

And, we all need to work doubly hard at meatspace fellowship as that cements the bonds created on this board.

LOVE you guys and happy to attack the gates of hell with you.

 

[The Revolting Man]

I have a flair for the dramatic but what I am about to say has been run through the Zec filter. We are pioneers, revolutionaries waging a guerrilla campaign in a hostile culture. The tools of our enemy are all focused on beating us down into that soft “Christ-like” mold they pretend represents Jesus. But Jesus was hardcore. He was combative with the Pharisees. Several of the things the Bible records Him saying were profanity at the time.

Now obviously He knew when to turn it on and turn it off. What we shouldn’t forget is that we have something the entire western church is lacking; we have men who are willing to stand against all opposition . That is a priceless resource. We shouldn’t be treating it like a problem. Proverbs tell us where there is no oxen the manger is clean but that there is great profit from the labor of the ox. Alright, some of us are oxes. I’m fine with that.

I think Samuel’s post prefixes are a good idea. It lets the warriors know when to train, when to relax and when to go to war. Warriors need structure. But the world needs warriors too. Don’t run them down or run them off.

My filter may have clogged somewhere in the second paragraph.

 

[Keith Martin]

I was one of those who brought this issue up, . . . because our concerns are unbalanced.

Thank you for doing that, Rock.

 

[Keith Martin]

1) Mild-mannered men declining to visit / post frequently. As a result, threads can be dominated by more fiery viewpoints.

Hi everyone. My name is Keith Martin. I am a recovering Sensitive New Age Guy. As such, I have grown to distrust the type of man I used to surround myself with.

Personally, I now experience most "mild-mannered" men as being worthy of suspicion. The manners are all there; they say all the 'right' things; but when it comes down to it they tend to be even less open-minded than the most dogmatic, chest-thumping, concrete bomb-thrower. I experienced this in person at last month's retreat. Someone I was eager to meet due to his participation on these forums and recommendations from a couple BF community members turned out to be entirely unwilling to include me in conversation because -- and this was unmistakable -- my humor fell outside of his restrictions.

In contrast, I feel more welcome here and in meatspace with many who hold almost diametrically-opposed religious, social, philosophical and political views from mine.

 

[PeteR]

I have a flair for the dramatic but what I am about to say has been run through the Zec filter. We are pioneers, revolutionaries waging a guerrilla campaign in a hostile culture. The tools of our enemy are all focused on beating us down into that soft “Christ-like” mold they pretend represents Jesus. But Jesus was hardcore. He was combative with the Pharisees. Several of the things the Bible records Him saying were profanity at the time.

Now obviously He knew when to turn it on and turn it off. What we shouldn’t forget is that we have something the entire western church is lacking; we have men who are willing to stand against all opposition . That is a priceless resource. We shouldn’t be treating it like a problem. Proverbs tell us where there is no oxen the manger is clean but that there is great profit from the labor of the ox. Alright, some of us are oxes. I’m fine with that.

I think Samuel’s post prefixes are a good idea. It lets the warriors know when to train, when to relax and when to go to war. Warriors need structure. But the world needs warriors too. Don’t run them down or run them off.

My filter may have clogged somewhere in the second paragraph.

Preach!

 

[Keith Martin]

Do we need to change anything, and if so what?

I have been asserting rather assertively lately in a handful of threads that a very short list of unsuitable male misbehaviors (promoting progeny-proliferation over more important male responsibilities like sustaining marriages; promoting actual abuse; promoting bullying dominance over caring leadership) and a corresponding very short list of unsuitable female misbehaviors (expecting angelic empathy while hiding behind victimhood to get away with being antagonistic; making false accusations) should be curtailed, but otherwise I firmly believe that attempting to turn this into Unicorn Land will only result in creating Unicorn Land on the surface but creating Vacuous Land at all the deeper levels, which may on the fringes keep some additional useless people around but cause those of us who have much more significant contributions to make to conclude that participation is a complete waste of time.

Beware anyone who comes with a message of Utopia.

 

[rockfox]

Why is that?

There is another, more germane, explanation...the squeaky wheel gets the grease.

 

[rockfox]

I have been asserting rather assertively lately in a handful of threads that a very short list of unsuitable male misbehaviors (promoting progeny-proliferation over more important male responsibilities like sustaining marriages; promoting actual abuse; promoting bullying dominance over caring leadership) and a corresponding very short list of unsuitable female misbehaviors (expecting angelic empathy while hiding behind victimhood to get away with being antagonistic; making false accusations) should be curtailed,

And I have likewise countered that these are imaginary problems or unreasonable expectations; mostly. Otherwise I agree with the comment.

 

[Keith Martin]

Edit: can you add another selection to the survey? Something like: casually annoyed, sometimes highly entertained, but mostly I just accept my brothers’ and sisters’ flaws and idiosyncrasies and love them regardless and I’m here because we’re family.

I like this. I really don't want to be critical, so I kept my mouth shut, but I thought that, as a Likert scale, there was too much of a gap between selection 1 and selection 2 (as well as that selection 5 should be moved back into the selection 3 position). Does the software for this web site allow for a 6 or 7 point survey?

And dare I ask such a question without having to risk @Asforme&myhouse musing about whether I might be amazed that there are actually such things as flying machines!

 

[Keith Martin]

Another potential answer is this place isn't really any different than most churches, the women rule by proxy through their husbands and the women here are upset so something must change.

I am in complete agreement with you, here, Rock, on both counts:

Any time something starts to resemble Church sends up all my red flags.

And just because a woman is upset is always insufficient reason to change anything. Women being upset is just part of the landscape of life. As men, we have to recognize that we tend to see the women in our life vacillate among a wide-ranging array of emotions, many of them qualifying as "being upset." If we change in reaction to female upset alone, we can't help but eliminate the most bedrock (no accident that 'rock' is part of that) male contribution we have to make to females. When men allow female upset to dictate their decision-making, they become unmoored and cannot provide any meaningful leadership.

 

[Keith Martin]

Another potential answer is it's all about the women. People care more about not scaring off potential wives than they do actual ministry to families (which includes men). I've seen more than one comment to the effect of, "don't say that, you'll scare away the women" where 'that' is a truth taught in scripture.

I do know, Rock, that you are implicating me in particular here, based on our recent interchanges in the Patriarchal Catfish Wannabees thread. I'm not thinking you're singling me out altogether, but I know you believe this is what I'm doing.

But I'm not.

What I will own is that I do believe that it is to our overall benefit as Biblical Families men to give serious consideration to whether or not we're driving off women over issues that simply don't matter as much as whether good female prospects who are truly seeking male headship are drawn to and remain within the bosom of Biblical Families.

But I don't believe we should do that at any cost. I believe it has to be done strategically, and I particularly believe that we not only shouldn't care if women who don't really believe in male headship and/or are actively antagonistic toward either male headship or biblical polygamy leave, I think if anything we should perhaps purposefully drive them away. Antagonistic activists always have insidious effects on organizations.

Where I would continue to challenge you is in this way: be careful that you're not unfairly and actually quite inaccurately oversimplifying arguments into false dichotomies. I 'liked' your post, because I believe it contained a great deal of wisdom. But you also created a false dichotomy when you asserted that, "I've seen more than one comment to the effect of, 'don't say that, you'll scare away the women' where 'that' is a truth taught in scripture." I challenge you to, instead of just saying something is ridiculous or claiming that someone is bowing down to feminism, keep your powder dry until you find yourself confronted with an example of what you're claiming here that actually does involve a man worrying about whether the women will be scared away and is attempting to stop other men from speaking truth that is actually taught in scripture. In order to qualify for all that, one can't just take a verse out of context and demand that it applies to everything in the world. There are undeniable universal truths in Scripture, and any attempt on the part of men to silence those truths should be resisted and called out by other men. On the other hand, a great deal of what gets argued about in these forum threads is not a matter of undeniable universal truth but instead of particular nuanced individual interpretations based on translations we've personally chosen to at least some extent based on how they line up with how we want to see Scripture. There's no problem with engaging in intellectual theological debate about those interpretations, but they simply don't rise to the level of expecting them to trump either the true scriptural truths or implementation of respectful treatment of others and the other fruits of the spirit.

I do not, for example, believe I made any request for men to deny scriptural truth when I criticized men for promoting the use of nonconsensual physical violence toward their wives or criticized them for publicly over-valuing progeny proliferation. Of course, I could be wrong, but then you'd pretty much have to present scriptural evidence for where it states that beating one's wife or being required to be fruitful and multiply to the detriment of abiding by the rest of God's imperatives are salvation issues.

If you can do that with me, or if you can ever demonstrate that any other man has truly elevated maximizing bride availability over scriptural truth, I will join you in decrying it.